Is Scott Brooks officially on watch now?

With 2008-09 Coach of the Year Mike Brown getting fired Monday, the COY Curse thing has become a hot topic of conversation. The last four Coach of the Year winners were fired within two seasons of winning the award. Avery Johnson won the award for 2005-06 and was fired in 2008. Sam Mitchell won in 2006-07 and was fired in 2008. Byron Scott won in 2007-08 and then fired in 2009. Mike Brown won the 2008-09 award and was axed this week. So who’s the dead man walking that won the 2009-10 Coach of the Year? OH CRAP.

Obviously, nobody sees any potential for Scott Brooks to get into hot water. Honestly, it’s pretty much inconceivable. I’m sitting here trying to conceive it, and I can’t. Brooks is darn near as popular as the highest profile players. He’s excellent with the media, he’s kind and he’s a pretty darn good coach. He fits the culture and philosophy of the franchise perfectly. But fanbases and front offices sour on coaches faster than a gallon of two percent left on the front porch. When things start to go bad, the coach is always the one that gets fingered for being the guy that screwed it all up.

But it is a little weird to see it happen so quickly. Heck, Mike Brown won Coach of the Year just one year ago. He was named the NBA’s best coach. As in, considering all other options in the league, Mike Brown outcoached every single one of them. And yet, he got canned.

So why does the axe come down on these Coaches of the Year? Here’s my theory: They’ve raised the bar for themselves to a level where expectations get slightly ridiculous. Consider Brown who captained the Cavs to two straight 60-win seasons and is the most successful coach in franchise history. He was fired because “he” didn’t get the job done in the postseason. The team performed outstandingly in the regular season but fell flat when the games really mattered. So he got the boot. Bring in the next guy that can win the big games, management thought. And when you win in the regular season, it’s expected that you win in the postseason. If you can win in one environment, you should be able to win in the other. And when you don’t, something obviously has to be wrong. It’s immediately assumed they can’t win the big one so somebody has to be brought in that can.

So why does the axe come down on these Coaches of the Year? Here's my theory: They've raised the bar for themselves to a level where expectations get slightly ridiculous.

That’s why Brown was fired. It’s why Mike Woodson was fired. It’s why countless head men get roasted. The reality is, Coach of the Year really means very little. It’s a nice award and a nice honor. It’s supposed to symbolize the highest individual achievement for a coach. You did an amazing job of coaching, the team won a lot, so therefore you must be rewarded. Typically, coaches that champion “turnaround” seasons have the best success. But our culture – and especially sports culture – is a what-have-you-done-for-me-NOW group. We don’t care about lately. We want success NOW. How Utah has gotten away with hanging in there with Jerry Sloan year after year is beyond me. I assume it’s because he was sort of grandfathered in as a coaching legend and most of the young fanbase would revolt if Sloan were fired. Sloan hasn’t won anything. He’s famously come up short multiple times. But he’s an excellent coach and Jazz management understands that. They aren’t going to find someone better, so why change? Bill Cowher is another example and imagine the satisfaction when he won the Super Bowl finally.

So obviously, now Scott Brooks is the only Coach of the Year left standing. And next season, expectations will be lifted for him and his team. Not just in the regular season. But the postseason. Win 50 games again and get to the playoffs? Good job. But now it’s time to get out of the first round. If you don’t, we’ll put you on the hot seat. It sounds a little unreasonable today, but let’s say the Thunder wins 53 games next year. They draw the four-seed in the West and lose in the first round to a quality team. Then in 2012 when the Thunder’s supposed to REALLY compete, they start slowly. Something like 15-15 around Christmas time. Couldn’t you see Brooks getting fired for that? I could. I definitely don’t agree with it, but I could see it.

Now of course in Mike Brown’s case, when you’ve got great players you’re naturally going to win. And while the players were largely responsible for the 61 regular season wins, the coach is almost always most responsible for the playoff losses. It’s the way sports work and everyone knows it. Coaches don’t gripe about it because it’s just the way it is. And that will be the circumstance for Brooks. He’s got one of the most gifted rosters in the league. They should mature into big time winners. And Brooks is supposed to be the man that oversees that and makes sure it happens.

I’m a fan of franchise continuity. I think if a guy is winning and things are going well, there’s no reason to change. Most moves are done to satisfy and overzealous, hungry fanbase that demands answers NOW for recent failures. But knee-jerking is never good for anyone.

So if Oklahoma City crosses a similar path in two years with Scott Brooks, I hope the Thunder defer to good faith in Coach Scotty. I hope we go the Utah Jazz, Pittsburgh Steelers route. The Thunder’s already built a pretty model franchise that prides itself on doing everything perfectly perfect and I don’t see any reason why knee-jerking would come into the equation. Sam Presti hasn’t done that with cap money or draft picks, so I don’t see why he’d start with his Coach of the Year.

Now of course, Coach Scotty could just go ahead and lead the Thunder to an NBA Finals or maybe even a championship and take care of this problem before it even happens too…

You know, I can't think of any other team that has used the Thunder's method of building a team ENTIRELY through the draft. It's why the Thunder's future is so hard to predict; there is no other team to compare them to.

Anonymous :I agree, Phil, Pop, Sloan, etc will never win the CoY award because they’re actually in the running for “hall of fame coach” rather than just a single year of success.I’d throw Larry Brown in there but since his scandal in the NCAA will probably keep him out.Don Nelson will probably be in the Basketball HoF, but he can’t win any awards since he’s also insane.

As long as Brooks keeps the team motivated and playing hard, I think he's safe. The Cavs looked uninspired in their last couple of games against Boston, which made Mike Brown look even worse than he already did for losing the series.

Keith :@ChrisJerry Sloan has never won it, despite consistently being in the playoffs and often times getting more out of his roster than expected. The important thing is to judge Brooks now on how well he actually handles the team, not on the unreasonable jump the team made in his first full year.

@ChrisJerry Sloan has never won it, despite consistently being in the playoffs and often times getting more out of his roster than expected. The important thing is to judge Brooks now on how well he actually handles the team, not on the unreasonable jump the team made in his first full year.

Coach of the Year seems to be awarded to the coach who had very low expectations and performed admirably rather than the best coach in the league. The “curse” only exists for this reason. We would see fewer coaches fired if the award actually went to the best coach.

Consider Phil Jackson. He’s been an NBA head coach since the 1989-1990 season (he didn’t coach during the 1998-1999 season). His teams have made the playoffs every year. He’s won a record 10 NBA titles; at one point winning nine titles in 12 years. And he has only one Coach of the Year Award.

It probably doesn't help longevity either when in many cases the COY recipient isn't a very good coach to begin with. Like everyone has said already, they just give it out to most improved team. Heck, the voters rarely even take into account the previous year's injuries.

Though I will say, Brooks is pretty similar to Mitchell. He took over for a team that was already on it's way up (Brooks with KD, Mitchell with Bosh). He's going to be judged in the media based on this season, and his interim job is going to be largely ignored. I think his prospects are better because he instilled defense-first, but that, just like Mitchell, he'll be on the hot seat if the team doesn't continue to improve.

Will they have enough team offense lead by the Head Coach and PG and with the rest of the current starting lineup beyond Durant / Westbrook to get to the second round or beyond? Maybe. Still work to do and change of several kinds to do or possibly do. If not, after 1-2 more tries it should be clear where it didn't work well enough. I'd tend to spread the responsibility for success or failure to every level- player, coach and GM- in almost every case.

If Green plays 35 or so minutes a game and if Presti would not tolerate anything different next season or the season after then the playoff results of that decision would fall on Green and Presti... and really Brooks too for agreeing to it.

Kev :Coaches get fired because spoiled and impatient fan bases assume their team will automatically improve from year to year – it is totally unreasonable to expect 50-60 wins every season – when it doesn’t happen, coaches get fired. Why? You can’t fire players (guaranteed contracts) . . .

Yep, which is why the Jazz fans have always been considered some of the best and most savvy fans for the last 20 years.

Coaches get fired because spoiled and impatient fan bases assume their team will automatically improve from year to year - it is totally unreasonable to expect 50-60 wins every season - when it doesn't happen, coaches get fired. Why? You can't fire players (guaranteed contracts) . . .